Hindsight is Always A Good Thing, Isn’t It?

Months ago when the media started to pick up the migrant and refugee situation, I told my husband that we were lucky that in the UK, our Prime Minister decided not to back down with the European Union’s idea of taking in refugees coming from Syria. It was definitely not a popular opinion, and many has branded me either racist or fascist.

I mean, how silly is that?

We are living in a world where political correctness has taken over the freedom of speech, and freedom of thought. I agree that some people are just dickheads who would say anything out of spite, which some people deemed as hate speech. This is where the the blurred line is drawn. How do you know when you’re being critical to an ideology, or when you are just being purely hateful?

In my own definition of hate speech and freedom of speech, the line is drawn where the opinion is targeted to. I believe that ideologies, ideas, opinions, as well as beliefs are open for criticism. You can criticise liberalism, democracy, capitalism or socialism, nihilsm, humanism, Christianity and of course Islam as an ideology, but… it has turned into a hate speech when you start attacking a person, personality or their lifestyle.

How about the sentence “British women going to Syria to fight alongside ISIS and being a jihadi bride is stupid”? Does it mean that the women were stupid – which is an attack to a person? Or does it mean that going to Syria to be a jihadi bride is stupid – which is a criticism towards the idea of going to a war torn country to marry a terrorist she never knew?

Back to the day when I said that I was glad that our PM refused to accept those so called refugees. Why did I say that they were “so called” refugees?

Simple Definition of refugee

: someone who has been forced to leave a country because of war or for religious or political reasons

Full Definition of refugee

: one that flees; especially: a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution

So… If someone has fled from Syria to Turkey for example, then Turkey government had to take them in because they are refugees. I can deal with it. But since Turkey is not a war torn country and that these people were not persecuted in Turkey, once these refugees left Turkey to find a better life in Europe their status would change into… “economic migrant”. Can you follow the logic up to this point? If you can, please continue…

If, these people who is now an economic migrant tried to enter a country illegally, their status would be now an illegal immigrant. Would you be surprised if a country would reject these people as they are now illegal immigrant?

No. I totally support them.

When PM Cameron decided only to take proper refugees — those who are from the refugee camp to the UK, after the Home Office got all the documents and background check, many British citizen called him inhumane and embarrassment to the country. They got so defiant and even printed a sticker saying that “refugees welcome” and put it in their house’s window. Why? I think it is just because that was the most PC thing to do or say.

I wonder what is in their mind when Norway had to teach these people about consent and rape. I wonder what is in their mind when France and Belgium is now dealing with terror attacks. I wonder what they are saying now after Germany — who has accepted more than a million refugee now is dealing with sex attacks in several cities (most notably Cologne). Angela Merkel is now tightening the border and wouldn’t let any more refugees in. But isn’t it a bit late for that?

Of course some apologist would say that there’s no link between the sex attacks and the refugees, and that we shouldn’t generalise refugees and crime rate. No we don’t generalise. We don’t say ALL refugees are shit because that would be hate speech (according to my own definition of hate speech I said above). We are saying that the idea of taking shitload of people without checking their background beforehand is just the definition of silly. We are saying that ultimately the government’s responsibility is not to the welfare of the refugees, but to protect its own citizen first and foremost.